If you like this story, consider signing up for our email newsletters.
SHOW ME HOW
You have successfully signed up for your selected newsletter(s) - please keep an eye on your mailbox, we're movin' in!
You say potato, we say dumbass.
British nutritionist Alan Dangour authored a study that suggests organic foods may not be any healthier than what his work terms "conventionally produced" foods. Dangour bases this on similar nutrient levels between the two groups of food.
First off, far as we're concerned the only "conventionally produced foods" are the ones that grow wild. There's nothing conventional about industrialized agribusiness, it's unnatural by definition.
Dangour's study reviewed 50 years worth of British health studies to come to its conclusion. Cause the British in the 60's are everybody's first choice for health advice.
Sheah Rarback, director of nutrition at the Mailman Center for Child Development at the University of Miami School of Medicine says that even if organics and inorganics share similar nutrient contents, there are other variables in determining healthfulness, like lack of pesticides. True indeed.
Dangour does make a good point in talking about the organic industry as big business, noting its 22% increase in market share in the UK from 2005 - 2007. Anytime big money is involved, there's bound to be dirt, and we don't mean the kind you grow tomatoes in.